Rsyslog contains a set of automatted tests, the so-called “testbench”. It is invoked via the standard method of “make check” and “make distcheck”. Since its introduction in version 3, the testbench has been continously enhanced and extended. It now contains around 150 individual tests, which sum up to around 80 tests from the autoconf point of view (some autoconf tests run a couple of subtests, thus the difference in number). The testbench has been proven to be very useful and caught numerous problems before new code was released.
But the testbench is not perfect, and it may sometimes fail without any actual problem. There are two reasons for this. One is that the test require a very specific environment. For example, some parser based tests assume that the system the test is run on is configured to be named “localhost.localdomain” (the default for many test deployments). This needs to be the case because there currently is no way in rsyslog to overwrite the local hostname. Some parser tests use malformed messages, in which case (as of the RFC), the local system name must be used. As such, we need to have a specific system name set in order to prove the results. In the long term, I’ll add the capability to overwrite system name inside rsyslog, but it does not make sense to create a dirty trick just for testbench use. So this needs to wait until we get to it as part of regular development. Note that a similar issues may exist at other places. An obvious one is the database tests, where we need pre-created users, databases, tables etc in order to run the tests.
The other issue is a bit more subtle. The syslog protocol is simply, without App-Layer acknowledgments. This makes it hard to know when rsyslog has received a while bunch of test data. That in turn makes it hard to definitely say when all test data has arrived and an instance can be shut down. So the whole process is a bit racy. To “solve” this, I use some wait periods in tests affected by this problem. However, longer wait periods mean longer test bench runtime and this reduces my development productivity. So I use wait time that usually does the job, but may fail under some circumstances (most notably when –enable-debug is set). This can affect a couple of TCP-based tests (like imtcp_conndrop.sh and similar ones). I have not yet a good idea what a clean solution to this problem is, where “clean” means that it a) always works and b) does no introduce unnecessary code complexity under non-testbench runs.
Given these problems, some care must be taken interpreting testbench results. Most importantly, a fail does not necessarily mean that things are actually broken. It merely means that one needs to look at the actual test and check a) why it fails and b) if it fails repeatedly. Especially the “racy” test tend to occasionally fail without any real problem. I’ve also seen them to fail consistenly on some platforms, simply because my timing assumptions are not valid there (Solaris was one example where I needed to adjust my overall wait periods).
So testbench results need to be taken with a grain of salt, and require interpretation. I know this is inconvenient for occasional users, but it is the best compromise I currently can offer.
I wanted to point out that failover actions and asynchronous processing does not work well in rsyslog — at least if a simple approach is used. The reason is that there is a conceptual problem with them working both together: async actions will – by design – always return an “everything went OK” status (because we don’t know otherwise, as things are async!). So this means failover processing will never see an error.
Now look the following config:
If the Action Queue Type is set to linked list (and thus the action executed asynchronously), the other two actions will never be executed – because the async action always “succeeds”.
There are two ways to solve this situation:
1) do run the action synchronously — depending on your needs, this may be a solution or not
2) if you need to run it async, you need to define a new ruleset, which includes the config WITHOUT the async processing. Then, use omruleset to execute the newly defined ruleset as whole asynchronously. This is obviously a bit more complex, but will do what you need.
I hope this resolves some confusion about the failover functionality (and, yes, a better config language would make this less painful — hopefully we will finally be able to write one ;)).
This is just a quick note that systemd is doing really well in providing logging right from the system startup, even when no syslogd is running. The magic is that messages are put into the kernel log, where the (later started) syslogd can pull them from. Unfortunately, there are some downsides from this mode, and we are currently working to solve them. For more details, please follow this thread:
I guess the remaining issues will be settled soon, as almost everything is in place and I just need to add some additional parsing logic to rsyslog. Due to the conference next week, I may need one extra week to complete that. All of this work will be part of the newly opened v5-devel (and above).
I have just released rsyslog v5.7.9. It will possibly be the last v5-beta versions of the 5.7. branch. I’ve ironed out a lot of bugs during the past two to three weeks. Right now, some patches are in 5.7.9 and not in the current stable, because I wait for some more feedback on the patches.There are still some bugs open in bugzilla, but all of this bugs are mostly concerned with rather exotic environments AND are present in the current v5-stable as well. So there is little argument to hold the new v5-stable branch just for that reason.
The plan is to release a last 5.6.6 version, ending that branch. Shortly after that, I’ll release 5.8.0. That way, conservative operators receive the latest round of bug fixes and can probably wait quite relaxed until 5.8.1 arrives ;)
It should be noted that 5.8.0 will be the first stable version with full support for systemd.
the refactoring and enhancement of imfile done by Nikolaidis Fotis has reached a first public-visible result. I have just created a new experimental git branch with his work:
The code is probably not 100% finished, but it provides a preview plus the ability to suggest further improvements.
Please note that the code base has evolved since the refactoring begun. So in order to integrate into the main code line, we must see that we can adopt to the recent changes to imfile. Most importantly, you should try to merge this branch with v5-devel, which gives me a lot of issues when I try to do it. We will look at this once the new modules codebase has matured (and Nikolaidis gives me a “go” for that activity).